ncloud_list_cache_backups

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read operation, so the description does not need to restate that. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as what list of backups is returned, whether it includes automatic backups, or any filtering/ordering behavior. With the annotation covering safety, a 3 is appropriate for a simple list operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence that conveys the essential information without any wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb 'List' and clearly names the resource, making it easy to scan.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list operation with one parameter and a read-only hint, the description is minimally adequate. However, there is no output schema and the description does not clarify what fields or extent of backup information will be returned, nor does it contrast with the similar sibling ncloud_list_cache_backup_details. This leaves gaps for an agent deciding between these tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema fully describes the single parameter cloudCacheInstanceNo with a description 'Cloud Cache instance number'. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is warranted.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'backups for a Cloud DB for Cache (Redis/Valkey) instance', making the primary purpose obvious. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ncloud_list_cache_backup_details or ncloud_list_cache_manual_backups, so it loses a point for missing sibling differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention whether this includes automatic and manual backups, nor does it point to ncloud_list_cache_backup_details for more detailed information. The description simply states the operation without any contextual usage direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.